Gov to Allow Those Unlawfully Present In The US to Become Lawyers

The official Summary of AB 1024 as passed by the Assembly /Senate:

 SUMMARY : Provides that upon certification by the examining   committee of the State Bar that an applicant who is not lawfully present in the United States has fulfilled the requirements for admission to practice law, the Supreme Court may admit that applicant as an attorney at law in all the courts of this state and may direct an order to be entered upon its records to that effect.

How did this happen?  Well, first of all the vote was 62 Yes  4 Noes and 12 were absent or abstained.   Much complaining has occurred over the supermajority of Democrats in the California Assembly. BUT OF those 12 absent/abstaining ONLY one was a Democrat.  

So of the 25 Republicans  ONLY 4 voted against the bill.   11 went missing.  And 10 thought it was a good idea to have those Unlawfully Present in The US practice Law - monkey around with our laws.    

Further Synopsis from the CA.Gov Leginfo website describes the reasoning:

This bill is a direct response to an admission application by Sergio Garcia currently pending at the California State Supreme Court.

And the clincher:
Federal law requires enactment of a state law affirmatively providing eligibility for public benefits to undocumented immigrations if the public benefit consists of a grant, contract, loan, professional license, or commercial license, and the public benefit is provided by an agency of a State or local government or by appropriated funds of a State or local government.

So the confused logic comes up with:
This bill would ensure that the required law affirmatively provides the required eligibility, assuming that admission to the State Bar by the California Supreme Court is a public benefit provided by a state agency or by appropriated funds so as to trigger the obligation to enact a state law, and further assuming that such a law has not already been enacted.

So because the Fed Government says we have to provide public benefits to those Unlawfully Present in the US. The CA legislators have extended their interpretation to include "assuming that admission to the State Bar by the California Supreme Court is a public benefit"

So in theory - no law can be applied to a person Unlawfully Present In the US because it would interfere with their access to public benefits.

Even the limitation of who can run for office..for President.

 Life - Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness for everyone -

whether or not they pass health requirements to determine if they are a HEALTH risk to the rest of us already here.

whether or not they have the means and skills to support themselves - and therefore pull upon the economy and future of a strong nation

whether or not they have a respect of civil community - or respect of the law (!)!)

The guise of giving "those unlawfully present in the US" the ability (not the requirement as citizens are required) to obtain a driver's license completely hid the attention from the inane bill introduced and passed by a group of legislators who really should go through drug testing before they vote.